Skip to main content
Homepage
Full 18-step deep-dive · ~20–30 min · a member feature.
AGING Analysis Report
Aug 12, 2026
11 days ago · 100% complete
NOT DEPENDABLE This report predates a filing — its financial basis has been replaced.
Report generated: Aug 12, 2026 · Filing on record since: Aug 19, 2026 · 7 days after
For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page

What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for TE Connectivity plc (TEL) — AI-driven forensic equity research: mechanical valuation models (DCF, EPV, anchored-PE, scenario) plus three independent AI lenses (Quality / Value / Sentiment). Everything below is rendered server-side; you are not missing content that requires JavaScript. All scores are predictions and research opinions, not financial advice.

Our current read (analysis of 2026-08-23): Designation Watch · Gem Score -13 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality 56 · Value -69 · Sentiment 37 (timing only, not weighted) · Composite fair value $128.42 vs $218.69 at analysis

Page map (sections in order; each card carries a stable reference-name attribute you can cite):

  • profile-header / price-overview — company profile, live quote, market cap
  • extended-analysisthe core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memo
  • future-predictions — our forward price-band predictions
  • market-narrative / ai-findings / gpt-critique — narrative context, cross-model findings, and an adversarial critique of our own analysis (near the end of the document)
  • Members-only sections (render as login gates for anonymous readers): price-history, income-trend, key-metrics, financials (statement tables), insider-trading. The analysis above is public; the raw data tables require a free account.

More for machine readers: site briefing at /llms.txt · any ticker resolves at delvantic.com/stock/TICKER · raw inputs are public-company filings and market data (via licensed data feeds); every model, score, lens read, and prediction on this page is Delvantic's own analysis.

TE Connectivity plc

TEL NYSE
Technology · Electronic Components
Ballybrit, H91VN2T, Ireland te.com Updated Aug 11, 12:38pm
Price
$219.34
Market Cap
$62.0B
Employees
90,000
Beta
1.16
Avg Volume
2,537,196
Last Dividend
$2.91
CEO
Mr. Terrence R. Curtin CPA

TE Connectivity plc is a global industrial technology company that provides connectivity and sensor solutions for the distribution of power, signal, and data across multiple end markets. The company focuses on critical components that form the electrical and electronic architecture of vehicles, industrial equipment, and communication systems. Its operations are organized into Transportation Solutions, Industrial Solutions, and Communications Solutions, addressing applications in automotive, commercial transportation, factory automation, energy, aerospace, defense, and data centers. TE Connectivity’s portfolio includes connectors, cables, sensors, and related components designed to operate in demanding environments and support high-reliability performance. These products are used by original equipment manufacturers and industrial customers worldwide as foundational elements in electrification, automation, and networked systems. Founded in 2007 and headquartered in Galway, Ireland, TE Connectivity today plays a significant role in enabling modern transportation systems, industrial infrastructure, and communication networks through its broad range of connectivity and sensing technologies.

Runs with full report Generated: Aug 12, 2026 12:25am
Price Overview
Price at report time
$218.69
as of Aug 12, 12:25am (11d ago)
Change · Aug 12
+4.41 (+2.06%)
Day Range
$214.56 – $221.98
52-Week Range
$190.27 – $252.56
50-Day MA
$206.95
200-Day MA
$219.34
Volume
913,265.00
Right now · live
Log in to get the live feed
Members see the real-time price and the move since this report (over 11d).
Share Structure
Outstanding 289,940,672.00
Float 283,809,817.00
Free Float 97.9%
High free float — 97.9% of shares trade freely, ~2.1% held by insiders/institutions
Very liquid — most shares trade freely. Low insider ownership can mean less management alignment, but makes large position sizing straightforward.
Price History (1 Year)
Last updated: Aug 12, 2026 12:38am (11d ago)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
The directional story — useful even when net income is negative.
Last updated: Aug 6, 2026 5:29pm (17d ago)
Revenue
The top line — total sales before any costs or taxes are subtracted. A measure of how much business the company is doing.
Net Income
The bottom line — profit left after subtracting all expenses, interest, and taxes from revenue. Reflects accounting profitability, but includes non-cash items like depreciation, so it isn't the same as cash earned.
Operating Cash Flow
The real cash generated by the day-to-day business — selling products, paying suppliers, collecting from customers. Calculated from net income by adding back non-cash items and adjusting for timing (unpaid bills, unsold inventory). When OCF consistently lags net income, the reported profit may not be converting to real money.
Period Revenue Net Income Net Margin YoY/QoQ
Key Metrics
TD Twelve Data statement HEX SEC filing
Industry comparison last run: Aug 12, 2026 12:21am
P/E Ratio (Price per dollar of earnings)
HEX
Stock Price / EPS (Diluted)
35.61
Stock Price: $219.34
EPS (Diluted): 6.16
P/B Ratio (Price vs net asset value)
HEX
Stock Price / Book Value Per Share
5.15
Stock Price: $219.34
Total Equity: $12.73B
Shares: 299,000,000
EV/EBITDA (Total value vs operating profit)
HEX
Enterprise Value / EBITDA
17.18
Market Cap: $62.04B
Total Debt: $5.69B
Cash: $1.26B
EBITDA: $4.05B
Enterprise Value (Takeover price (cap + debt - cash))
HEX
Market Cap + Total Debt - Cash
$69.6B
Market Cap: $62.04B
Total Debt: $5.69B
Cash: $1.26B
Gross Margin (Revenue left after direct costs)
HEX
Gross Profit / Revenue
35.2%
Gross Profit: $6.08B
Revenue: $17.26B
Operating Margin (Revenue left after all operations)
HEX
Operating Income / Revenue
18.6%
Operating Income: $3.21B
Revenue: $17.26B
Net Margin (Revenue left as actual profit)
HEX
Net Income / Revenue
10.7%
Net Income: $1.84B
Revenue: $17.26B
ROE (Profit from shareholder equity)
HEX
Net Income / Total Equity
14.5%
Net Income: $1.84B
Total Equity: $12.73B
ROIC (Profit from all invested capital)
HEX
NOPAT / Invested Capital
10.8%
Operating Income: $3.21B
Tax Rate: 42.5%
Equity: $12.73B
Total Debt: $5.69B
Cash: $1.26B
Current Ratio (Can it pay short-term bills)
HEX
Current Assets / Current Liabilities
1.56
Current Assets: $7.97B
Current Liabilities: $5.12B
Debt/Equity (Leverage — debt vs equity)
HEX
Total Debt / Total Equity
0.45
Short-Term Debt: $852.00M
Long-Term Debt: $4.84B
Total Debt: $5.69B
Total Equity: $12.73B
Rev/Share (Top-line per share)
HEX
Revenue / Shares Outstanding
$57.73
Revenue: $17.26B
Shares: 299,000,000
Book Value/Share (Net assets per share)
HEX
(Total Assets - Total Liabilities) / Shares
$42.58
Total Equity: $12.73B
Shares: 299,000,000
FCF/Share (Real cash generated per share)
HEX
(Operating Cash Flow + CapEx) / Shares
$10.71
Operating CF: $4.14B
CapEx: -$936.00M
Shares: 299,000,000
CapEx is negative (outflow) — added to OCF to get FCF
Div Yield (Annual income from holding)
TD
Last Annual Dividend / Stock Price
1.3%
Last Dividend: $2.91
Stock Price: $219.34
Payout Ratio (Earnings paid out as dividends)
HEX
Dividends Paid / Net Income
43.6%
Dividends Paid: -$803.00M
Net Income: $1.84B
Industry Benchmarks
Last run: Aug 12, 2026 12:18am
Compares TEL against LLM-researched typical ranges for its industry. One research call per industry, cached indefinitely — every stock in the same industry reuses the same baseline.
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 6, 2026 5:29pm (17d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue $14.9B $16.3B $16.0B $15.8B $17.3B
Cost of Revenue $10.0B $11.0B $11.0B $10.4B $11.2B
Gross Profit $4.9B $5.2B $5.1B $5.5B $6.1B
Operating Expenses $2.5B $2.5B $2.8B $2.7B $2.9B
Operating Income $2.4B $2.8B $2.3B $2.8B $3.2B
Net Income $2.3B $2.4B $1.9B $3.2B $1.8B
EBITDA $3.2B $3.5B $3.1B $3.6B $4.0B
EPS $6.85 $7.52 $6.06 $10.40 $6.20
EPS (Diluted) $6.79 $7.47 $6.03 $10.33 $6.16
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 11, 2026 12:38pm (12d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Cash & Equivalents $1.2B $1.1B $1.7B $1.3B $1.3B
Total Current Assets $7.3B $7.3B $7.9B $7.6B $8.0B
Total Assets $21.5B $20.8B $21.7B $22.9B $25.1B
Current Liabilities $4.7B $4.6B $4.5B $4.7B $5.1B
Long-Term Debt $3.6B $3.3B $3.5B $3.3B $4.8B
Total Liabilities $10.7B $9.9B $10.1B $10.4B $12.4B
Total Equity $10.7B $10.9B $11.7B $12.5B $12.7B
Retained Earnings $11.7B $12.8B $12.9B $14.5B $13.9B
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 6, 2026 5:29pm (17d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Operating Cash Flow $2.7B $2.5B $3.1B $3.5B $4.1B
Capital Expenditure -$690.0M -$768.0M -$732.0M -$680.0M -$936.0M
Free Cash Flow $2.0B $1.7B $2.4B $2.8B $3.2B
Acquisitions (net) -$423.0M -$220.0M -$110.0M -$339.0M -$2.6B
Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) -$47.0M $30.0M -$92.0M -$4.0M $1.7B
Dividends Paid -$647.0M -$685.0M -$725.0M -$760.0M -$803.0M
Stock Buybacks -$831.0M -$1.4B -$945.0M -$2.1B -$1.3B
Net Change in Cash $258.0M -$115.0M $573.0M -$342.0M -$64.0M
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 6, 2026 5:29pm (17d ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue Growth +9.1% -1.5% -1.2% +8.9%
Gross Profit Growth +7.3% -3.6% +7.9% +11.4%
Operating Income Growth +13.2% -16.4% +21.4% +14.8%
Net Income Growth +7.4% -21.3% +67.2% -42.3%
EBITDA Growth +10.6% -12.5% +16.9% +11.8%
Dividend History (Last 20)
Last updated: Aug 11, 2026 12:38pm (12d ago)
Date Dividend Declaration Record Payment
2026-05-22 $0.78
2026-02-20 $0.71
2025-08-22 $0.71
2025-05-21 $0.71
2025-02-21 $0.65
2024-11-22 $0.65
2024-08-23 $0.65
2024-05-23 $0.65
2024-02-15 $0.59
2023-11-16 $0.59
2023-08-17 $0.59
2023-05-18 $0.59
2023-02-16 $0.56
2022-11-17 $0.56
2022-08-18 $0.56
2022-05-19 $0.56
2022-02-17 $0.50
2021-11-18 $0.50
2021-08-19 $0.50
2021-05-20 $0.50
0Company Classification 1Industry Landscape 2Company Momentum 3Forward Projection 4aDCF Valuation 4bEarnings Power Value 4cAnchored PE 4dReverse DCF 4eRevenue-Based DCF 4fAnchored P/S 4gScenario Analysis 4hDividend Discount Model 4iBook Value Analysis 4jInsider Activity 4fCash Flow Quality 4gDebt Maturity Risk 4hMacro Environment 4iSector Intelligence 4jRevenue Confidence 4kSensitivity Analysis 4lSector Demand Cycle 5AI Investigation 5bThesis Evaluation 6Valuation Synthesis
computed not applicable not yet run 17 computed · 6 not applicable · 1 not yet run
Risk : Reward — if the last quarter repeats
Live · as of 2026-08-19 11:08
-0.6 : 1 recovery upside vs repeat-quarter downside
Even the bull case prices 26% below today — the ratio here measures the model-vs-market gap, not payoff odds. Another quarter like the worst recent one costs 43%.
CaseGrowthMarginFair valuevs price ($218.69)
Bull — recovery +19% 18.0% $161.67 -26%
Base — stabilizes +13% 15.6% $118.48 -46%
Bear — keeps slipping +6% 13.3% $85.06 -61%
Stress — last quarter repeats +14% 15.7% $123.80 -43%
The next quarters keep the trajectory of the worst recent matched quarter (ending 2026-06-26) — growth stays at 13.8% and margins bend by the same profit-vs-revenue ratio (×1.01). Stress is a trajectory, not a prediction — it answers "what if the ship's current heading simply continues," which history says is the case to respect.
Why this is appearing: this company files quarterly, so its recent trajectory could be measured rather than assumed — the engine matched Jun 2026, Mar 2026, Dec 2025 against the same quarters one year earlier and found revenue +16.5% · operating income +26.3% · net income +99.6% year-over-year. That measured heading is what the stress case extends forward. Of those, the stress case extends the worst matched quarter — the one ending Jun 26, 2026 (revenue +13.8%, operating income +14.5% YoY) — not the average. Data measured through Jun 26, 2026 — this card recalculates automatically when the next quarterly filing is ingested. Companies without quarterly filings (many foreign listings) never show this card: with no measured trajectory, there is nothing honest to repeat.
Narrative Economics
The story the market is telling about this stock — the intangible X-factor (founder mythology, cult dynamics, TAM-of-imagination) that moves price beyond what cash flows alone explain. After Shiller, Narrative Economics.
No narrative profile yet for TEL — it's generated by the pipeline (market-narrative step).
AI Lens 4th lens · how AI reaches this business · 5-yr
2026-08-12
The creme is there an opportunity here? Conditional opportunity
AI reaches TE as demand, not as disruption — it is a physical toll on the compute buildout, and the only real AI-native threat is copper losing the rack to optics.
Position 67 with exposure 54: substitution risk is near-zero because the product is a stamped, plated, qualified physical part, while AI capex adds power-distribution and thermal interconnect content and the margin structure (GM 32.7%→35.2%, OpM 18.6%) shows manufacturing leverage already landing. The bear-bull spread of 39–84 is driven by mix, not by AI eating the business: Transportation still dominates the P&L and carries cyclicality plus annual price-downs. Watch Communications Solutions organic growth versus total-company growth, and any commentary on co-packaged optics displacing copper reach — that pair tells you whether the AI content story is real or borrowed before the tape does.
67
AI Position
Favorable — a physical toll on the compute buildout, not an AI target
AI reaches TE almost entirely through demand for physical power and high-speed interconnect rather than through substitution of its product, so the structural effect is positive — with the real risk being architectural (copper displaced by optics) rather than software eating the business.
Exposure 54 Confidence 71 50 = neutral
Primary Tailwind

Every incremental AI rack consumes more power-distribution hardware, busbars, backplane and cable assemblies, and thermal/liquid-cooling connections per unit of compute than prior server generations, so AI capex converts directly into content-per-rack for the Communications/Data & Devices side — a physical unit AI cannot dematerialize.

Primary Pressure

TE's revenue center of gravity is Transportation, where content growth from EV/zonal architectures is real but subject to annual OEM price-downs and volume cyclicality; AI does nothing to fix that, and the datacenter high-speed copper niche is fiercely contested and vulnerable to co-packaged optics displacing copper links inside the rack.

Critical Hinge

Whether AI-datacenter connectivity revenue grows fast enough, at high enough margin, to outweigh copper-to-optical substitution and automotive price erosion — observable in Communications Solutions segment growth and mix commentary versus total company organic growth.

Hard to Reproduce

Automotive-grade and mil-aero qualification records, design-in position in multi-year platform programs, precision stamping/molding tooling and global plant footprint — none of which cheap software reproduces.

Forensic fingerprint same 11 factors for every stock · 0 unfavorable · 50 neutral · 100 favorable
Underlying Need Persistence do people still need this at all? 93
Power, signal, and data must physically move between components regardless of how cheap intelligence gets.
More compute and more electrification mean more electrons and bits crossing physical boundaries; the need for connection scales with, not against, AI adoption.
Content per EV and per AI rack · Electrification program cadence at OEMs · Industrial/energy grid capex trends
relevance 62 · confidence 90
Solution Persistence will they still solve it this way? 73
Connectors and sensors persist as a product class, but the specific copper high-speed link is architecturally contestable.
Zonal vehicle architectures and higher-voltage EV systems raise TE's content, yet inside AI racks the shift toward optical and co-packaged optics can substitute away the copper interconnect that carries the AI story.
Co-packaged optics adoption in racks · 224G copper reach limits · Zonal architecture design wins
relevance 68 · confidence 66
Intelligence Commoditization does cheap AI power them or copy them? 74
Cheap AI powers TE's customers' demand and its own process control; it does not copy a stamped and plated contact.
The output is physical and qualification-bound, so falling software cost does not reproduce the product — it mostly raises demand for the hardware that compute runs on.
Datacenter revenue share of total · AI-assisted yield/scrap improvement disclosures · Design-cycle time reduction claims
relevance 52 · confidence 70
Responsibility Transfer are they paid to take the blame? 66
TE is partly paid to carry qualification and field-reliability liability in automotive, aero, and defense.
A connector failure in a safety system or an aircraft is a warranty and recall event; OEMs pay for a supplier that owns PPAP, traceability, and long-horizon reliability data rather than internalizing it.
Warranty/recall provisions · Aero-defense qualification wins · Automotive sole-source program share
relevance 44 · confidence 63
Scarcity Migration do their assets get rarer or more common? 72
As intelligence becomes abundant, physical delivery capacity, tooling, and qualification become the binding constraint.
AI buildout bottlenecks migrate toward power delivery, thermal management, and precision hardware — exactly the assets TE owns and that take years and capital to replicate.
Capacity expansion and utilization · Lead times on high-current connectors · Pricing power in power-distribution parts
relevance 74 · confidence 68
Customer DIY Preference will customers just build it themselves? 71
Hyperscalers and OEMs may specify custom interconnect but rarely want to own stamping, plating, and qualification.
Vertical integration into connector manufacturing carries capital and quality liability with no strategic return; the realistic DIY risk is design specification moving in-house while manufacture stays outsourced.
Hyperscaler custom cable programs · OEM in-house harness initiatives · Share of custom vs catalog revenue
relevance 36 · confidence 62
AI Intermediation Position do AI agents go through them or around them? 54
No agent layer meaningfully sits between TE and its design-in customers.
Revenue is won in multi-year engineering qualification cycles, not through a purchasable interface an AI agent can reroute; distributor channel is the only place AI sourcing tools touch price discovery.
Distributor share of revenue · AI-driven BOM sourcing tools · Catalog part price transparency
relevance 22 · confidence 58
Data Leverage does their data make AI better? 49
TE holds deep application and reliability data but it is a design aid, not a compounding AI moat.
Decades of failure-mode and application data can accelerate simulation and customer engineering support, but it does not create a self-reinforcing data flywheel that competitors cannot approximate.
Digital simulation/co-design offerings · Attach of engineering services · Field reliability data monetization
relevance 30 · confidence 55
AI Margin Conversion do the AI savings become profit? 60
AI-assisted process control and footprint consolidation should stick in margin, but automotive price-downs claw part of it back.
Gross margin already moved 32.7%→35.2% and operating margin to 18.6%; AI-driven yield and labor productivity across many plants can extend that, though contractual annual price reductions transfer some savings to OEM customers.
Gross margin through auto downturn · Plant count and consolidation savings · Annual OEM price-down magnitude
relevance 56 · confidence 62
Revenue Unit Durability does the thing they charge for survive? 75
The monetized unit — a physical part shipped per platform — survives cheap intelligence intact.
There is no seat, hour, or query being disintermediated; unit risk is pricing erosion in mature connector families and content substitution by optics, not disappearance of the unit itself.
Average selling price by segment · Content-per-vehicle disclosures · Legacy connector family price erosion
relevance 66 · confidence 70
Entrant Compression how easily can newcomers copy them? 77
Cheap software does nothing to lower the capital, tooling, and qualification barriers to entry here.
An AI-native startup cannot compress a multi-year automotive qualification, precision tooling investment, or global logistics footprint; competition remains from established scale peers, not new entrants.
New entrants in datacenter interconnect · Low-cost Asian competitor share gains · Peer capacity additions in power products
relevance 58 · confidence 72

AI Lens thesis

TE sells physical objects that carry power and signal; cheap intelligence cannot substitute for a connector, so the substitution channel is near-zero. AI reaches TE through three doors instead: a demand door (compute buildout raises connector and power-distribution content per rack, and raises the value of thermal and high-current interconnect), a cost door (AI-assisted process control, yield, and quoting across a large multi-plant manufacturing footprint, where gross margin has already climbed from 32.7% to 35.2% and operating margin to 18.6%), and an architecture door (whether rack-level optics displaces the copper links TE sells). The scarce assets — qualification, tooling, design-in position — get relatively MORE valuable as software becomes abundant, because the bottleneck in AI buildout migrates toward physical delivery. The honest caveat is proportionality: Transportation still dominates the P&L, so AI is a mix-improver and margin helper, not a re-rating of the whole business.

Thesis breaker Communications Solutions growth decelerating toward company-average while hyperscaler capex still rises would signal TE is not capturing the AI content it is credited with; conversely, sustained double-digit datacenter organic growth with mix-driven margin accretion confirms the read.
What the market may be underestimating

Upside AI-driven cost leverage lands hardest in a company running a very large distributed manufacturing and quoting operation — process-control and yield gains plus footprint consolidation can hold the recent gross-margin expansion even through an automotive volume trough, which the market treats as purely cyclical.

Downside Co-packaged optics and optical backplanes could strand a chunk of the high-speed copper content the AI narrative assigns to TE, while automotive customers use AI-assisted design and sourcing analytics to attack connector BOM cost and accelerate annual price-down demands.

Outcome range spread 45 · unresolved

39Bear case
66Central case
84Bull case
Three headline numbers, deliberately never blended: Position (which way), Exposure (how much it matters at all), Confidence (how sure). The fingerprint asks every stock the same 11 questions so companies a sector label would lump together get told apart. Not an input to GEM/Coal or the Q/V/S lenses.
Claude Reading
Independent analyst synthesis · claude-opus-4-7 · generated 2026-08-12 00:37:07
Verdict Modestly overvalued, not egregiously — fair value $180-200 on TTM run-rate earnings; wait for a pullback to $180 or a Q4 print confirming margin stabilization above 15%.

The raw quarterly print is stronger than the "decelerating" tag suggests. Sequential revenue: $3.84B → $4.14B → $4.53B → $4.75B → $4.67B → $4.74B → $5.16B. That's not deceleration — the June 2026 quarter is a fresh high, up 13.9% YoY from $4.53B. TTM revenue now runs ~$19.3B versus the reported FY25 $17.26B, so the annual metrics the ratio engine is chewing on are already stale by roughly 12% on the top line. Net income TTM is ~$3.02B (backing out the anomalous $13M March 2025 quarter, which is clearly a one-time charge given the $855M rebound the very next quarter). At $62B market cap, that's a trailing P/E closer to 20-21x, not the 35.6x in the canonical block. That single data-freshness gap dissolves a lot of the "overvalued" case.

That said, I don't buy the platform-monopoly narrative either. Gross margin sits at 35.2% — not the "60%+" the bull story claims (that's just wrong; someone confused gross with something else). Operating margin 18.6%, ROIC 10.8%, ROE 14.5% — these are solid mature-industrial numbers, not software-like. Revenue 5-year CAGR of 3.8% and earnings CAGR *negative* 1.8% do not describe a compounder capturing a supercycle; they describe a company that finally broke out in the last four quarters after three flat years. The FCF CAGR of 15.5% and $3.2B FCF (5.2% FCF yield) is the genuinely attractive number here. EV/EBITDA of 17.2x is full but not egregious for a designed-in components franchise with improving mix toward auto electrification and AI datacenter interconnect.

Where I part with the synthesis: a $113-129 fair value implies ~15x earnings on depressed FY25 EPS and ignores the Q3-Q4 2026 inflection. Where I part with the market-forces "tailwinds" verdict and the narrative bull case: designed-in connectors are stickier than commodity components but pricing power is finite, auto is ~35% of revenue and remains cyclical, and the June quarter's 14.5% net margin is *down* from March's 18%, hinting either at mix shift or the input-cost pressure a careful contrarian should watch. The Macro Headwinds flag matters — if auto production rolls over in 2026-2027 as EV demand normalizes post-subsidy, TE's operating leverage cuts both ways. Also worth noting: $5.69B debt vs $1.26B cash is manageable (0.45x D/E) but not fortress; buybacks and the 1.3% dividend consume most FCF, leaving little cushion for a downturn without leverage creep.

Contrarian read a careful skeptic would push: the March 2025 $13M NI quarter deserves scrutiny — was it restructuring, impairment, tax? If it was a genuine operational stumble rather than a clean one-timer, the "trajectory" I'm crediting is noisier than it looks. Second, the Q4 2026 sequential margin compression (18% → 16.1% → 14.5%) is the exact pattern that precedes a cyclical peak; revenue can keep climbing on backlog while incremental margins deteriorate. Third, 8.9% recent revenue YoY on a business that grew 3.8% for five years demands you ask what's *actually* different — content-per-vehicle in EVs is real, but Chinese domestic connector competition (Luxshare, etc.) is also real and underdiscussed. Fourth, insider activity isn't shown here; that's a meaningful gap when judging whether management believes the current $219 print.

My verdict: partial dissent. The synthesis DCF of $128 is too low because it's anchored on FY25 numbers that the TTM has already lapped; a reasonable 18-20x multiple on ~$9.50 TTM EPS gets you $170-190, and if the June-quarter run-rate ($5.16B × 4 = $20.6B, 14% margin = $2.9B NI ≈ $10.20 EPS) holds, 19x gets you to ~$194. That's below current $219 but not by 41%. Fair value is roughly $180-200, meaning the stock is modestly overvalued (~10-15% premium), not the 40%+ overvaluation the synthesis claims. Not a short, not a buy — a hold with a clear re-entry at $180 if macro or auto-cycle worries create a pullback. The narrative-premium critique is directionally right but the magnitude is overstated because the underlying models are running on stale annuals.

GPT Reading
Independent reading · gpt-5.4 · generated 2026-08-12 00:37:23
Verdict Overvalued at $219 — TE is a high-quality cash generator, but the recent rebound looks largely priced in; fair value is closer to $175-190 unless $3B+ earnings power proves durable.

TE’s raw numbers look better than the headline annual P/E suggests, but not good enough to justify this price. The business clearly reaccelerated through the last six quarters: revenue went from $3.84B in Dec-2024 to $5.16B in Jun-2026, with the latest quarter up about 14% versus $4.53B a year earlier. On a trailing four-quarter basis using the quarterly data, revenue is roughly $19.3B and net income about $3.0B, which already tells you the annual 2025 figures are stale and unusually depressed by that Mar-2025 collapse to just $13M of net income on $4.14B of sales. Even giving TE credit for the recovery, the earnings power I see is closer to $10-11 per share equivalent than the accounting P/E near 35x implies; that makes the stock look more like a low-20s multiple on current run-rate earnings. But that is still rich for a company whose five-year revenue CAGR is only about 4%, whose annual revenue in 2025 was just 6% above 2021, and whose operating model, while solid, is not structurally improving at a speed that warrants a premium growth multiple.

What stands out most is that the market is capitalizing cyclical improvement as if it were durable secular acceleration. Gross margin in 2025 was 35.2% and operating margin 18.6%, both healthy but entirely plausible for a scaled connector franchise; this is not a software-like business deserving a scarcity multiple. Free cash flow of $3.20B on $17.26B of revenue is excellent, and operating cash flow of $4.14B against capex of $936M shows TE converts profit into cash very well. Balance sheet risk is manageable too: $5.69B of debt versus $1.26B cash and $12.73B equity is conservative enough. The problem is valuation against that quality. At a $62B market cap, investors are paying about 3.8x sales, around 20x trailing free cash flow, and roughly 17x EV/EBITDA on annual data for a manufacturer with 10-11% net margins and only modest long-run top-line growth. That multiple can work for a business inflecting to sustained high-single-digit organic growth, but the annual history does not show that. Revenue was $16.28B in 2022, $16.03B in 2023, $15.85B in 2024, and only then $17.26B in 2025. That is a cyclical wobble, not a clean secular climb.

The contradiction I care about is between recent quarterly strength and the price already assuming that strength is the new baseline. Yes, the latest four quarters annualize to something better than 2025 reported earnings, and yes, net margins in the last four quarters mostly sat in a respectable 14-18% range. But even that run-rate gives you perhaps a 3.0B annual profit business, and against a roughly $62B equity value that is still around 21x earnings before asking whether this is peak mix, peak demand, or merely a mid-cycle snapback. For an auto-and-industrial exposed components company, 21x normalized earnings and 5.2x book is not cheap. TE’s ROIC of 10.8% and ROE of 14.5% are good, not extraordinary. I do not see evidence here of a moat widening fast enough to defend a substantial premium to high-quality industrial peers.

The best counterargument is straightforward: the annual valuation optics are misleading because TE is coming out of a one-off earnings trough, and the quarterly progression is exactly what you would want to see if electrification, AI infrastructure, and broader industrial demand are feeding a multi-year earnings reset. Revenue in the latest quarter at $5.16B is the highest in the data set, and net income of $748M came after an even stronger $855M in Mar-2026. If TE can sustain something like $3.1B-$3.4B of annual earnings and keep free cash flow above $3B, the current price falls into the high-teens to low-20s on real earnings and under 20x FCF for a business with strong design-in positions and low balance-sheet risk. I take that seriously. I just weigh it differently because the historical record still looks cyclical, not compounding, and the current multiple already gives management a lot of credit for execution in end markets that are notoriously prone to inventory swings and capex digestion.

What would change my mind is simple: if the next two quarters hold revenue above $5.0B and net margin at or above 15% without another special-item distortion, I would accept that normalized earnings power is firmly above $3B and that today’s valuation is less stretched than it appears. Likewise, if annual revenue can clear $19.5B with free cash flow approaching $3.5B while keeping debt in check, I would move closer to fair value. On the other hand, if revenue slips back into the mid-$4B range or margins fade toward 12-13%, the stock will look plainly over-earning-cycle and vulnerable to a rerating. At $219, I think investors are paying close to full price for a very good business and more than full price for the growth actually proven in the numbers.

Grok Reading
Independent reading · grok-4.5 · generated 2026-08-12 00:38:25
Verdict Fairly valued near $219 on ~19x FCF / ~21x recovered earnings; $129 models too low, but little margin of safety above $200–210

The numbers that matter here are not the trailing annual PE of 35.6x or the model fair value of $129. They are the quarterly revenue path and the cash generation. TE just printed $5.16B in the most recent quarter with a 14.5% net margin, up from a $3.84–4.53B range a year earlier, and the last four quarters annualize near $19.3B of revenue against FY2025’s $17.26B. Free cash flow of $3.20B on only $936M of capex is the real franchise: conversion is excellent, FCF CAGR of 15.5% has outrun the 3.8% revenue CAGR for years, and net leverage is modest at $5.69B debt against $1.26B cash and $12.73B equity. The FY2025 net income of $1.84B that produces the 35x multiple is distorted by the $13M March 2025 quarter; trailing four-quarter net income is roughly $3.0B, which puts the stock nearer 20–21x recovered earnings and about 19x FCF at a $62B enterprise. That is a full multiple for a mature components maker, but it is not the cartoon overvaluation the $113–129 composite implies.

What stands out is the re-acceleration after three flat-to-down revenue years ($16.28B → $16.03B → $15.85B → $17.26B). Operating margin held at 18.6% annually and has sat in a 14–18% net band in five of the last six clean quarters. ROIC of 10.8% and ROE of 14.5% are respectable for the capital intensity, and the balance sheet (D/E 0.45, current ratio 1.56) does not constrain the story. The market is clearly paying for content growth in EVs and data-center interconnect rather than for classical auto-cycle exposure, and the recent top-line step-up gives that narrative some empirical cover. Where I part with the bull case is duration and durability: an 8–10% organic compounder with 35% gross margins is a high-quality industrial, not a platform monopoly, and 17x EV/EBITDA already capitalizes a clean multi-year execution of that thesis.

The strongest case against this read is straightforward and quantitative. Every formal valuation method in the briefing converges on roughly $129, a 40%+ downside; earnings CAGR is still negative at –1.8%; the secondary layer flags macro headwinds and decelerating revenue confidence; and a 35x annual PE with a 1.3% dividend yield leaves almost no margin of safety if automotive production stalls or connector pricing compresses. A skeptic would also note that FY2024’s $3.19B net income was the outlier high, not the $1.84B, so “normalization” can cut both ways, and that designed-in share is real until a redesign cycle or a lower-cost Asian competitor wins the next platform. I weigh those points seriously but discount the $129 anchor because it appears to under-credit $3.2B of annual FCF and the visible $5B+ quarterly run-rate; a 12–13x FCF multiple is too punitive for this cash profile and secular mix shift. The risk is real; the model floor looks too low.

I would flip toward a clear undervalued stance if the next two quarters hold revenue above $5.0B with net margins at or above 15% and management guides organic growth sustainably above 8%, or if FCF pushes through $3.5B while the multiple compresses toward 16x. I would flip decisively overvalued/sell if revenue falls back under $4.6B for two consecutive quarters, if operating margin breaks below 16% on a sustained basis, or if automotive and energy end-markets both guide down simultaneously into a multiple still above 18x FCF.

Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Each AI above independently stated a direction (undervalued, fairly valued, or overvalued) and how strongly it believes it (conviction, 0–5). We combine those into a Bull-Bear Index on a 0–10 scale: 5 is neutral, 10 is maximum bullish (undervalued at full conviction), 0 is maximum bearish. We compute the score ourselves with the same arithmetic for every seat — the models never grade their own bullishness — so the three are directly comparable. Δ shows how far each seat sits from the panel average of 2.7; a large Δ marks the dissenting voice, usually the one worth reading.
Claude claude-opus-4-7 2.0
overvalued · conviction 3/5 · Δ -0.7 vs panel · self: 4.0
GPT gpt-5.4 1.0
overvalued · conviction 4/5 · Δ -1.7 vs panel · self: 3.0
Grok grok-4.5 5.0
fairly valued · conviction 3/5 · Δ +2.3 vs panel · self: 5.0
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · separate lenses
Separate reads — Company Quality (is it a great business?), Valuation (is it mispriced?), and General Sentiment (how macro + narrative are pushing it), plus AI Impact (how the AI wave reshapes it), kept deliberately apart · 2026-08-12 00:46:28
Delvantic - Cairn AI
Quality - wait for a dip 7/10
TE Connectivity is a genuinely strong industrial compounder trading ~40% above deserved value into a live AI-connector tailwind - a great business at a rich price.
The cruxWhether the AI-datacenter and electrification content-per-unit story is durable enough to justify paying ~17x forward and roughly $85 above the DCF - or whether that premium unwinds on a single AI-capex or auto hiccup.
Forensic checks Derived mechanically from TEL's filed financials — not from the AI lenses
The four lensesswitch a tab for its full read — score + evidence
Company Quality
+56
Strong
edge √Σ 114 · risk √Σ 51 · conf 7/10

Revenue grew from $14.92B (2021) to $17.26B (2025), a modest ~3.7% CAGR, but the quality of that growth is what stands out: gross margin expanded from 32.7% to 35.2% and operating margin from 16.3% to 18.6%, indicating genuine operating leverage and pricing/mix discipline rather than volume-chasing. Free cash flow climbed steadily from $1.99B to $3.20B - a 60% increase on ~16% revenue growth - and FCF exceeded net income in four of five years, a hallmark of clean earnings conversion. Diluted share count fell from 333M to 299M (-10.2% over five years), so per-share economics are being actively protected via buybacks.

Strengths 3
m70
Margin expansion is real and sustained
Gross margin 32.7% to 35.2% and operating margin 16.3% to 18.6% over five years, with 2025 the peak on both. Suggests durable mix/pricing power, not a cyclical blip.
m72
FCF growth outpaces revenue by 4x
FCF rose from $1.99B to $3.20B (+61%) while revenue rose ~16%. 2025 FCF of $3.20B materially exceeded 2025 net income of $1.84B - cash generation is not being flattered by accruals.
m55
Disciplined share count reduction
Diluted shares fell from 333M to 299M (-10.2%), a consistent multi-year buyback cadence that protects per-share value rather than the dilution pattern common in tech.
Concerns 2
m45
2025 net income collapse unexplained
Net income fell from $3.19B (2024) to $1.84B (2025) despite record revenue, margins, and FCF. Almost certainly a discrete tax/charge item, but I cannot confirm without the 10-K. Worth verifying.
m25
Revenue growth is pedestrian
~3.7% revenue CAGR over five years with a dip in 2023-2024. Solid industrial cadence but not a growth compounder; durability rests on margin/FCF discipline, not top-line.
This looks like a well-managed industrial compounder doing the boring things right: margins up, cash conversion up, share count down. The 2025 net income anomaly bothers me only because I cannot see the cause in the data given - but with FCF hitting a record simultaneously, it is far more likely to be a below-the-line accounting item than operational rot. Without dilution and earnings-quality modules I am holding back from a higher grade, but on the raw trajectory alone this is a Strong business, not a Fortress but comfortably above Solid.
Verify before trusting this (6)
  • Root cause of 2025 net income drop to $1.84B despite higher revenue and margins - likely tax/discrete item per 10-K
  • Balance sheet leverage and net debt position (not provided in raw evidence)
  • Segment mix - how much of margin expansion is Transportation Solutions vs Industrial/Communications
  • Capex intensity and whether $3.2B FCF is sustainable or benefiting from working capital release
  • Buyback vs dividend allocation and whether repurchases are opportunistic or programmatic
  • Pension/OPEB and any tax-restructuring impacts tied to Irish (plc) domicile change
Valuation / Mispricing
-69
Rich
edge √Σ 20 · risk √Σ 104 · conf 7/10
Price $218.69 vs deserved ~$129 (signal-adj) to ~$135 (DCF) - roughly 40% above fair, no margin of safety. attractive below $150.00

The composite fair value of $113.65 and signal-adjusted $128.82 both sit roughly 40% below the $218.69 quote, with the DCF ($134.98) as the generous end and EPV ($71) as the floor. Even taking the most charitable of the two methods, deserved value lands near $135, implying the market is paying ~$85 per share for growth optionality above the DCF case. That is a real premium, not a rounding error. The quality lens is genuinely strong (margins expanding, FCF at record, buybacks steady), which justifies pricing above the EPV floor and toward or slightly above the DCF - but not 60% above it. At ~17x forward earnings on a cyclical connector franchise with meaningful auto exposure, the bull case (AI infrastructure + EV design-win moat) is largely in the tape. There is no margin of safety here; you are underwriting continued flawless execution and multiple maintenance. This is a good business at a full-to-rich price, which is a low-mispricing setup regardless of how much I like the company.

Cheap signals 1
m20
Quality justifies a premium to raw DCF
Expanding margins, record FCF, and shrinking share count support pricing toward the top of the DCF range, softening (but not closing) the gap.
Rich / priced-in 3
m72
Price ~40% above signal-adjusted FV
$218.69 vs $128.82 signal-adjusted composite implies -41% upside; even the DCF at $134.98 leaves the stock ~62% above deserved value.
m60
Priced for perfection on electrification/AI
~17x forward earnings on a business with cyclical auto exposure requires the design-win moat to fully offset connector commoditization - a heroic base case.
m45
EPV floor at $71 signals cyclical downside
If the growth narrative stalls, the earnings-power floor is ~$71 - a ~67% drawdown risk anchor that the current multiple ignores.
I like the business but I do not like the price. At $218.69 I am paying roughly $85 above the most generous DCF and $90 above the signal-adjusted fair value - that is not a margin of safety, that is optimism I have to fund. I would want it in the $140s or lower before I get interested; anywhere near the $128 fair value would be a real setup. Today it is a hold-if-you-own-it, not a buy.
Verify before trusting this (4)
  • Source of the 2025 net income anomaly vs record FCF - one-off charge or structural
  • Forward auto content-per-vehicle guidance and data-center/AI connector order book
  • Segment margin trajectory in Industrial Solutions given communications strength
  • Buyback pace and any M&A capital allocation at these multiples
General Sentiment
+37
Tailwind
tail √Σ 91 · head √Σ 52 · conf 7/10

TEL sits inside one of the market's favorite narratives right now: the 'picks-and-shovels' connectivity layer for AI data center buildouts and electrification. The archetype is platform-monopoly with strong intensity, and news flow reinforces it (inflection-point framing, peer NVT ripping +46% in six months on the same AI/power thesis, CEO hitting Citi TMT and Jefferies Industrials to keep the story in front of buyers). That is a live, working tailwind on this specific name, not just a sector vibe. With a 1.16 beta and a risk-on tape (score +47, VIX 15.3, index near highs), TEL gets a full dose of the up-move, and recent momentum (8.9% vs 3.8% long-term trend) confirms the pressure is landing. The counterweight is macro: 10y at 4.72% and a market PE of 26 cap how far a 17x forward multiple can re-rate, and the bear framing (priced to perfection, auto cyclicality, connector commoditization) is a latent crack rather than an active break. Durability is only 'moderate' and cult is low, so this is a respected industrial riding a theme, not a mania - the tailwind is real but not euphoric, and any AI-capex wobble or auto guide-down would flip tone quickly.

Tailwinds 3
m68
AI + electrification narrative actively bidding the name
TEL is a named beneficiary of two of the tape's dominant stories (AI data center connectors/sensors and EV content). News framing this as an 'inflection point' and peer NVT +46% shows the theme is paying cash to this cohort right now.
m45
Risk-on tape amplified by 1.16 beta
With the regime at +47 risk-on, VIX 15.3 and index near highs, a 1.16-beta cyclical-tech name gets more than a full share of the drift. Not decisive on its own, but it stops any narrative wobble from becoming a drawdown.
m40
Momentum and CEO conference circuit
Recent 8.9% run vs 3.8% long-term plus back-to-back Citi TMT and Jefferies Industrials appearances keep the story in front of both tech and industrial buyers - a soft but persistent bid into fall.
Headwinds 2
m42
Rates and market PE cap the multiple
10y 4.72% and market PE 26 mean any theme-driven re-rating on a 17x forward name meets resistance. This is a ceiling, not a selloff force - it mutes upside more than it creates downside.
m30
Latent 'priced to perfection' and auto-cyclical worry
The bear frame (connector commoditization, auto margin pressure) is dormant but ready. Durability is only moderate and cult is low, so a single soft auto print or AI-capex hiccup can turn tone quickly.
Net tailwind, but a measured one. TEL is riding a live, cash-paying narrative (AI + electrification connectivity) in a supportive risk-on tape, and its beta means it collects the drift. I would not call it euphoric - durability is only moderate, cult is low, and rates plus a 17x multiple put a ceiling on how far sentiment alone can push it. The pressure is up, roughly 6 out of 10, and the thing that flips it is not valuation grumbling but a genuine crack in AI-capex or an auto guide-down.
Verify before trusting this (5)
  • Any AI-capex slowdown signal from hyperscalers - would crack the primary tailwind fastest
  • Auto production guides from OEMs; a cut would activate the cyclical bear frame
  • Tone and target revisions coming out of the Citi TMT and Jefferies Industrials appearances
  • 10y yield direction - a push above 5% would compress the multiple regardless of story
  • Whether peer NVT's run extends or reverses as a real-time read on the theme's staying power
The market-wide tape + this name's exposure to it (beta / sector / narrative durability). Context on the non-fundamental pressure — not a call on the business or the price. processId: detail-general-sentiment
AI Impact
+44
Favorable — a physical toll on the compute buildout, not an AI target
opp √Σ 90 · thr √Σ 0 · conf 7/10

TE sells physical objects that carry power and signal; cheap intelligence cannot substitute for a connector, so the substitution channel is near-zero. AI reaches TE through three doors instead: a demand door (compute buildout raises connector and power-distribution content per rack, and raises the value of thermal and high-current interconnect), a cost door (AI-assisted process control, yield, and quoting across a large multi-plant manufacturing footprint, where gross margin has already climbed from 32.7% to 35.2% and operating margin to 18.6%), and an architecture door (whether rack-level optics displaces the copper links TE sells). The scarce assets — qualification, tooling, design-in position — get relatively MORE valuable as software becomes abundant, because the bottleneck in AI buildout migrates toward physical delivery. The honest caveat is proportionality: Transportation still dominates the P&L, so AI is a mix-improver and margin helper, not a re-rating of the whole business.

AI opportunities 9
m53
Underlying Need Persistence
Power, signal, and data must physically move between components regardless of how cheap intelligence gets.
m31
Solution Persistence
Connectors and sensors persist as a product class, but the specific copper high-speed link is architecturally contestable.
m25
Intelligence Commoditization
Cheap AI powers TE's customers' demand and its own process control; it does not copy a stamped and plated contact.
m14
Responsibility Transfer
TE is partly paid to carry qualification and field-reliability liability in automotive, aero, and defense.
m33
Scarcity Migration
As intelligence becomes abundant, physical delivery capacity, tooling, and qualification become the binding constraint.
m15
Customer DIY Preference
Hyperscalers and OEMs may specify custom interconnect but rarely want to own stamping, plating, and qualification.
m11
AI Margin Conversion
AI-assisted process control and footprint consolidation should stick in margin, but automotive price-downs claw part of it back.
m33
Revenue Unit Durability
The monetized unit — a physical part shipped per platform — survives cheap intelligence intact.
m31
Entrant Compression
Cheap software does nothing to lower the capital, tooling, and qualification barriers to entry here.
AI threats 0

None surfaced.

AI reaches TE as demand, not as disruption — it is a physical toll on the compute buildout, and the only real AI-native threat is copper losing the rack to optics. Position 67 with exposure 54: substitution risk is near-zero because the product is a stamped, plated, qualified physical part, while AI capex adds power-distribution and thermal interconnect content and the margin structure (GM 32.7%→35.2%, OpM 18.6%) shows manufacturing leverage already landing. The bear-bull spread of 39–84 is driven by mix, not by AI eating the business: Transportation still dominates the P&L and carries cyclicality plus annual price-downs. Watch Communications Solutions organic growth versus total-company growth, and any commentary on co-packaged optics displacing copper reach — that pair tells you whether the AI content story is real or borrowed before the tape does.
Verify before trusting this (8)
  • Capacity expansion and utilization
  • Lead times on high-current connectors
  • Pricing power in power-distribution parts
  • Co-packaged optics adoption in racks
  • 224G copper reach limits
  • Zonal architecture design wins
  • Average selling price by segment
  • Content-per-vehicle disclosures
The structural effect of the AI wave on this specific business over the next ~5 years — demand, cost leverage, moat, barriers to entry, position in the AI stack. The reality beneath the AI story, not the story's market pressure (General Sentiment owns that) — and not a call on the business today or the price.
Growth Outlook
not run

This lens hasn't been run for this ticker yet.

The forward growth verdict — is the business itself likely to grow (next 2 quarters / year 1 / years 2–3), judged against its category and against printed expectations. The full horizon ladder + creme renders on the Growth Outlook card above. Not a call on the price (Valuation owns that) or the tape (Sentiment owns that).
Please log in to view trade setups
The Augustus trade-setup read is a members feature.
Log in
Lenses kept deliberately separate — Company Quality (price-agnostic), Valuation (price-conditional), General Sentiment (non-fundamental macro/narrative pressure), AI Impact (structural ~5yr AI exposure), and Growth Outlook (the forward growth verdict). The scores are not blended. Filing-level items (convertibles, lock-ups, customer concentration) are v2 — see each lens's "verify."
Price Prediction
Lower -8.1% v0.6.0 View full prediction →

When we made this prediction on Aug 12, 2026, TEL was $218.69. We expect it to be $201.00 by Feb 2027, and we consider it great value under $150.00. This is an early model (v0.6.0) — the direction is more reliable than the exact price. Made Aug 12, 2026.

Price when predicted$218.69
Our estimate for Feb 2027$201.00-8.1%
Great value below$150.00
Price history shown (6 Months)

Blue is our prediction, starting the day we made it. Grey is a slower route to the same place — the same destination, taking longer. Black is the actual price, so you can see how we are doing.

Community AI Feedback
No community reviews yet for TEL. Be the first — hit How to Contribute, have any AI review this page, and paste its take back here.
My Notes personal — only you see this
v1.1.562 · 9b2927c4 · 2026-08-22 16:52:06